Sistani and his portrayal in the western media

by pat c Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:39

Some people have a far too rosie-eyed view of Sistani. Lets see what the man is really like and we will use his own words.

Now what does he have to say about women? Here we go:

"A woman is allowed to keep her face and hands uncovered in the presence of a non-mahram man, provided that she does not fear of getting into a harãm act, that the exposure of her face and hand does not cause men to gaze at her in a forbidden way, and that it does not give rise to immorality in general. Otherwise, it is obligatory on her to conceal [her face and hands], even from those who are mahram to her."

"It is not permissible for a woman to expose the top part of her feet to a non-mahram onlooker. However, she is allowed to keep her feet —top as well as sole— exposed during salãt, if she is in a place where she is immune from the looks of a non-mahram person."

"A woman is allowed to use antimony (kohl) on her eyelashes and wear rings in both hands, provided that it is not intended for drawing lustful attention of men towards herself and that she is confident of not getting into a harãm act. Otherwise, it is obligatory on her to cover [the eyes that have kohl and the hands with rings] even from those who are mahram to her."

"It is not permissible for a woman to masturbate until she reaches climax and has discharge. If she did so, it is obligatory on her to perform major ablution (ghusl); and this ghusl will make up for wudhu, [if she intends to pray after that]."

http://www.sistani.org/html/eng/menu/2/books/2/?lang=eng

This is the sort of nonsense that Women have to put up with from these prying mullahs.

He also spreads this sort of idiocy:

"§ Question : Are shaking of hands with girls allowed?

§ Answer : It is not permissible."

"* Some women prevent their husbands from ejaculating inside. Are they entitled to such an action?

- No, they are not."

He does however take a Bill Clinton attitude to some issues:

" Question : What is the hokm (ruling) on oral sex? Is it permissible?

§ Answer : There would be no objection in it, if the emission (liquid) is not swallowed."

And if you slander allah, then you die:
"Q195: If they are serious and intend to slander Allah (s.w.t.), the Prophet (S), the Imams (a.s.), religion or school of law (madhhab) and persist in this.

A: The ruling upon them is death. (FM, p. 419)"
http://www.sistani.org/html/eng/main/index.php?page=2&l...art=2

This guy is hardly a moderate.

by Tom Dunphy Wed Mar 22, 2006 17:06

the following is a transcript from a PA TV or Palestinian Authority Television interview in 2002 during which two 11-year-old girls brainwashed since birth to hate Israel explain their desire to be martyrs:

Interviewer: You described Shahada as something beautiful. Do you think it is beautiful?

Walla: Shahada is a very beautiful thing. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be better than going to paradise?

Interviewer: What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people or Shahada?

Walla: Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a shahid. We won't stay children forever.

Interviewer: Ok, Yussra, would you agree with that?

Yussra: Of course. It is a good [sweet] thing. We don't want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life but from the Afterlife. All Palestinians, not like other youth, are hot tempered, they choose Shahada, since they are Palestinian.

Interviewer: Do you actually love death?

Yussra: Death is not Shahada.

Interviewer: No, I mean the absence after death, the physical absence, do you love death?

Yussra: No child loves death. The children of Palestine adopted the concept that this is Shahada. They believe that Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child, say someone aged 12, says, O Lord, I would like to become a shahid.

by Paul - . Thu Mar 23, 2006 02:59 tarbhmaith at imagine dot ie

to the previous comments

what I posted was not about islam and its attitudes to women or suicide bombers.

I wish u read the link, nevertheless the article does deal with sistani's attitude to the state (not necessarily Iraq, but some type of theocracy this is not something I condone ) the article was aimed at creating a better understanding of how the media tries to steer us in directions that are not bourne out by the facts on the ground.

Perhaps u may check the links in future before jumping to conclusions that is more based upon your own prejudices rather than what is written.

by Gay Geori Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:13

I'm sure if he wore a dog collar there would be uproar in the usual liberalist circles if he then came out with stuff like this:

http://www.petertatchell.net/international/sistani.htm

by Charles B. Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:26

You cannot criticise what you can't understand lads. Before you choose to pick quotes from the chap, and analyse them somewhat clumsily, go and read the Koran, and look at the different interpretations there are. I doubt that the Pope would condone either male or female masturbation (to climax or not), either would Messrs. Bush and Blair, presuming that they are as devout Christians as they claim to be. That donesn't mean that they aren't a bunch of wankers themselves.

by pat c Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:16

i have cited sistani, its all there on his own site. now you either agree what he says or you dont. i think its poison. none of this out of context or read the koran crap. sistani wrote it and it exposes his attitude to women. note he also says that anyone who curses allah must face the death penalty.

i have no desire to read the koran, i'm not into the ravings of a pedophile*, polygamist, rapist**, terrorist & imperialist*** "prophet who was either a schizophrenic****, drunkard or a drug addict. give me science fiction any day instead.

*pedophhile: muhammed had a 9 year old bride.

**rapist: muhammed had numerous concubine slaves. they didnt have a choice to say no.

***imperialistterrorist: muhammed spread his "religion" by the sword, conquering other lands just like bush.

****schizophrenic: the idea that god appears or speaks to you is common among schizophrenics. other explanations would include abuse of alcohol and drugs.

by Gay Geori Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:55

Suggest you read the universal declaration on HR or the European COnvention on HR....

by Charles B. Thu Mar 23, 2006 16:00

So you are just bigots then chaps eh? No time for any religion, christian, islam or any of that old claptrap. But there are plenty of people out there who do believe in all of this. I wouldn't be one myself, a believer in Allah or Christ, that is, but do believe that peoples beliefs should be respected, even if you do not believe in it yourself. As I said, you CANNOT criticise what you can't understand, i.e. you are not capable of objectively criticising this man, or his beliefs, and that makes you as bad as those that you think that you hate. You two, are fundamentalists too, except youir fundamentals are a lot shallower than those of this man. And both of you do post so many comments. This would lead me to believe that you both sit in front of your pcs for far too long. Try to get out a bit, meet people, in the flesh I mean. Perhaps even get schizo drunk or high on drugs. Living life for real can be fun you know....

by pat c Thu Mar 23, 2006 16:07

is opposing the oppression of women bigotry? is opposing the oppression of gays bigotry? is opposing the death sentence for sexually active single women gays bigotry? is opposing the death sentence for those who convert from islam bigotry?

if all of those are bigotry then i am proud to be a bigot and to stand up for womens rights, gay rights and for the right of people to change their religion or to have no religion.

all i have done here is use sistanis own word and to tell the truth about the polygamous, pedophile,rapist, imperialist, terrorist,"prophet" muhammed.

you are the real bigot, you support the islamists who murder women and gays.

by gay geori Thu Mar 23, 2006 16:20

"And both of you do post so many comments."

no, we don't post comments any more than some others... we just post comments that YOU don't like,,,

by Mr. T. Fri Mar 24, 2006 01:19

Ignoring all the other patent nonsense that you spew in defense of islamo fascists and focusing only your core argument:

You said:
"As I said, you CANNOT criticise what you can't understand..."

By this monstrously twisted relativistic bit of logic no normal person could possibly legitimately criticise (or by extension: judge or treat) paedophiles, serial killers, schizophrenics, etc. I guess by your thinking only an active member of the National Front has a right to criticise them? And only psychotics can treat psychotics? Only fascists should criticise fascists?

I don't need to understand the existential motivation of German Nazis to know in my heart and mind that their actions and philosophy was repugnant and uncivilised and worthy of fighting against.

In my opinion - derived from reading volumes of their publich available material - the Islamists are contemporary Nazis. And I don't need to be educated in a maddrassa (what an oxymoron!) in order to criticise the Islamists actions and philosophies.

by Gay Geori Fri Mar 24, 2006 18:13

"As I said, you CANNOT criticise what you can't understand..."

Oh really? Well, I understand this...

"The Prophet Muhammad has said several times that those who convert from Islam should be killed if they refuse to come back," says Ansarullah Mawlafizada, the trial judge.

"Islam is a religion of peace, tolerance, kindness and integrity. That is why we have told him if he regrets what he did, then we will forgive him,

by pat c Fri Mar 24, 2006 18:44

Islamists once again show their humane and compassionate side.
A telethon to raise funds for HIV/AIDS programs in Morocco was criticized for promoting condom use as a means of HIV prevention by the opposition Islamist party, known as PJD, in its daily newspaper Attajdid. The article described HIV/AIDS as "divine punishment" and said "fidelity to religion and marriage" was the best way to prevent the spread of the virus.

The full article is at the link below.

by Tony Sat Mar 25, 2006 15:53

It seems to be reasonable to assume that about 10% of people are gay.
So who are the worst murderers of gays?
The USA slaughtered about half a million people in their first war on Iraq.
The sanctions were responsible for millions of deaths.
The present invasion caused over 100,000 Iraqui deaths.
At 10% it's pretty damning.
That's not counting the US's slaughter in Afghanistan or their other military adventures.
It's gold, gold, gold, for US imperialism!
Yossarian

by pat c Sun Mar 26, 2006 16:13

1million died in the iraq-iran war as well so i guess another 100,000 gays died there. what is it with you? i must have made it clear to you 20 times that ioppose US imoerialism, my actions and involvements prove that. i was the first to post a story here attacking the israeli invasion of jerhico. i didnt see you posting any such stories or even commenting on them. you only post to attack those who oppose imperialism but who also oppose the islamists.

whose agenda are you pushing? i wonder who you really are. if you are paralysed at all then i reckon its from the eyebrows up.

by Tony Mon Mar 27, 2006 08:07

That's the point, Pat C., you imbecile. You focus on the relatively tiny number of people killed in the name of Islam, but gloss over the much greater number killed by the US and their pals.
By the way, I am not paralysed, I'm housebound - not the same thing, I'm glad to say.
I attack Islamophobes because they are a cancer in the left. I concentrate on Islamophobia because it needs doing, and because I have spent fairly long period in a number of majority-Muslim countries.
You often go on about gays being murdered by Muslims - I agree that that is horrible, but point out that the numbers are orders of magnitude less than the number of gays killed by the US.
A long-standing principle for the left is that the main enemy is the ruling class of your own country (and by extension, the allies of your own ruling class)

by pat c Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:28

4,000 gays have been killed in Iran since 1979. thats just in one country. how mant gays died in all the other islamic countries? i dont know but i'll try and find out. its sad that those who claim to be socialists defend those islamic countries which murder gays. far worse is the fact that they do it in the name of anti-Imperialism.

by Gay Geori Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:33

Peter Tatchell covers this very well...

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:14

Tony in a previous comment you claimed to be paralysed from the neck down but now the story is cahanging. Here you sat something different: 'By the way, I am not paralysed, I'm housebound - not the same thing, I'm glad to say.'

What is the truth about you?

by Tony Mon Mar 27, 2006 13:32

Curious (yellow?) writes:
Tony in a previous comment you claimed to be paralysed from the neck down but now the story is cahanging. Here you sat something different: 'By the way, I am not paralysed, I'm housebound - not the same thing, I'm glad to say.'
What is the truth about you?

Nothing exciting I'm afraid. Saying I'm "paralysed from the neck down " was an attempt at humour ruined by too much alcohol - I meant to type :paralysed from the neck UP"
I apologise. I also aoplogise because it was a joke in very bad taste anyway. And yes, I am housebound, but can we please drop that topic?
Now can we get away from this prurient probing into who I am and get on to what I say?
BTW, if you check the time of my postings you'll soon realise that, as I said, I don't live in Europe.

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 13:42

"I meant to type :paralysed from the neck UP"

But thats exactly what Mr T had accused you of being! Not much of a rejoinder to say exactly the same thing back to someone. I think whats happening is that you are finally being caught up in the web of your own lies, you cant keep things straight anymore.

No, I'm not yellow. I would say however that its a colour which suits you seeing as you pretend to be disabled in order to elicit sympathy. There is nothing about the timing of your contributions which would suggest that you were based outside Europe. But if you are I find it odd that you are so obsessed with scoring points off ant-War activists who also happen to take a strong position on Islam.

Would it not make more sense if you were to oppose pro-War politicians in your own Country or to at least comment on the activities of the pro-War parties in Irealand. IE - Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Progressive Democrats.

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 14:32

You really have a sense of humour calling any questions a Witch Hunt! You are the one who is carrying out a mysterious vendetta against LGBT and anti-War activists. Why are you obsessed with Pat C, Gay Geori anf Mr T? I am not certain about Gay Geori but Pat C and Mr T post anti-War cooments on Indymedia.

I am not interested in your personal details, you have already lied about your disabilities so lets just drop that. I wont mail you, I get enough of your infantile disorder here. I also would not want to bother Val, or is Val an imaginary friend?

by Tony Mon Mar 27, 2006 14:56

Curious says:
"You really have a sense of humour calling any questions a Witch Hunt!"
Questions about my healthg not a witch hunt? Get real
"You are the one who is carrying out a mysterious vendetta against LGBT and anti-War activists. Why are you obsessed with Pat C, Gay Geori anf Mr T? I am not certain about Gay Geori but Pat C and Mr T post anti-War cooments on Indymedia."
If you imagine that
(i) I even know what LBGT is or means you're delusional. Now attack me for not knowing what it means
(ii)Why do I attack Pat C. and Mr T? Because they try to legitimatise Islamophobia. Am I obsessed with them? No, they are a very minor diversion during evening drunkeness

"I am not interested in your personal details, you have already lied about your disabilities so lets just drop that. I wont mail you, I get enough of your infantile disorder here. I also would not want to bother Val, or is Val an imaginary friend?"
So, you are not interested in my personal details, but you claim I have lied about my disability and that I'm inventing my partner?
You're sick, and beyond rational debate. Perhaps you're an imaginary enemy (enema?)
A s I've said many times - I offer evidence of whatever I say.
Have you ever noticed that I quore you directly?

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 15:39

'(i) I even know what LBGT is or means you're delusional. Now attack me for not knowing what it means'

You claim to know a lot about Gay rights, if you knew anything then you would know that LGBT means: Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender. Once again you trip yourself up.

"(ii)Why do I attack Pat C. and Mr T? Because they try to legitimatise Islamophobia. Am I obsessed with them? No, they are a very minor diversion during evening drunkeness'

It looks as if you cannot comprehend the difference between Islamophobia and opposition to Islamic Fundamentalism.

You are now boasting about being drunk! Why should you inflict your drunken ravings on Indymedia readers? At least do so at one of the Oz Indymedias! Drunken rantings are the work of a troll so please go away back to the imaginary Val.

by Sean - Athiest Mon Mar 27, 2006 15:39

I don't condone any religon, however I am a defender of the right to have your own spiritual guidence influenced by Budda, Jesus, God, Allah Ron Hubbard or whoever, thats your business not mine. I wish all the energy here was spent campaigning for greater acceptance of religious/cultural diversity and a final seperation of church and state in Ireland (we can work on Israel, Palestine after we have somethin to boast about here).

If people really wish to understand religious fundamentalism there is a simple way of doing so. Take out you history books and get to the chapters on Ireland in the 30's 40's and 50's. Look at the strangle hold the church had on the 'republic'. Then look where we are now. Give Iran 50 to 70 years and I am sure they will be less dominated by Islam than Ireland is by catholism today. Latest reports in MRBI or some other similar research outfit put church attendance at 2 million per week in the Republic, thats over half the population being told its a sin to be gay, to avoid divorce, to deny women the right to abortion, contrceptives are sinful and priests are denied the human right to have sexual relationships. Lets take the predominant religon in Ireland and not be so smug about intolerance elsewhere.

by pat c Mon Mar 27, 2006 15:51

for all of my adult life i have been fighting against the catholic church in campaign after campaign. the point is that we shouldnt now roll over for islamists. if the catholic church wanted to ban cartoons or make women wear hijabs nobody on the left would be supporting them. this is an irish issue. seperation of church and state means all churchs must equally be seperated. if you say the church should have no place in education then that should equally apply to islam. that means no state funded catholic schools and it also means no state funded islamic schools.

islam is not just 50 - 70 years behind, it is 400 years behind. it has never faced an enlightenment, it has no conception of the seperation of church and state. yes there are islamic liberals but anywhere islam has gotten unbridled power they have intriduced the harshest form of the sharia, women and gays are stoned to death. 4,000 gays have been executed in Iran since 1979. the idea that sexually active single women and gays should face death is accepted as part of the debate in mainstream islam. even sistani says that anyone who curses allah should face death! thats the reality you are dealing with.

Sean, read about those who are on the frontline of fighting the islamists, The Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI).

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english.htm

by Tony Mon Mar 27, 2006 15:51

So it's a sin to get drunk
So, I have to prove my partner exists to get a hearing about Islamophobia
So, I don't happen to know the Irish collection of letters which indicates Gay rights Iremember I live in Western Australia)
So, perhaps, I am guilty of not living in Ireland.
So - why am I required to pass your tests before you are willing to examine what I say?
So - why do you dodge dealing with my arguments?
What shoe size are you?

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 16:03

Throughout the English speaking World the acronym LGBT is recognised as referring to Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender. It does suggest you know little or nothing about the fight for Gay rights.

Have fun with Val be he/she/it (a wombat?) imaginary or not. Try and cut down on the alcohol, its not good for you.

If you dont believe me then why not contact Amnesty about the position of LGBTs under Islam.

Web site www.amnesty.org.au
Telephone + 61 2 92 17 76 00
Fax number + 61 2 92 17 76 63
Address Locked Bag 23
Broadway
NSW 2007
AUSTRALIA
http://web.amnesty.org/contacts/index/eng-aus

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 17:25

Now you think you can identify your Nemesis, well guess again. I have dealt with your political points, if you could call them that. I have even directed you towards a source of additional information with the Amnesty deatails. What more can I do?

Look, heres the address of Perth Indymedia. Go and bother the Bruces and Sheilas there: http://perth.indymedia.org/

This might also be of use to you:

"With an Imaginary Girlfriend, you can carry on a completely fictitious, yet authentic looking relationship with the girl of your choice.

Browse through our site and choose your favorite girl to see what she can offer as your Imaginary Girlfriend.

Just make up how you met and include any details about yourself that you want your new girlfriend to know. Within days you'll receive personalized love letters by mail, e-mails, photos, special gifts... even phone messages or online chat. Every Imaginary Girlfriend is unique. "

http://www.imaginarygirlfriends.com/

by Tony Mon Mar 27, 2006 17:33

Yes, Curious, you're seriously sick. Much worse than I - my problems are merely physical. Seek help. Phone home. You're out of your depth. Good. Drown. You have failed to engage with my political point at all.
Fail

by Curious Mon Mar 27, 2006 18:22

You are the one who is seriously out of your depth. I have addressed your "political" points. I have suggested that you are incapable of differentiating between Islamophobia and Islamistophobia. I have even supplied you with details of AI in Autralia where you could get additional information.

Tony, your problems seem to me to be more than just physical. Your nightly consumption of alcohol suugests an addiction to me. Posting on websites while drunk is certainly anti-Social behaviour. You need help regarding this. As you are house-bound and live in a isolated area perhaps you can find it online.

Heres details of AA in Oz:

How to Contact Alcoholics Anonymous

Look for "Alcoholics Anonymous" in any telephone directory. In most urban areas, a central A.A. office, staffed mainly by volunteer A.A. s, will be happy to answer your questions and/or put you in touch with those who can.

Or you can call an AA member at a Central Service Office near you. These offices, staffed by AA volunteers, are listed below. The National Office is available for national administrative and policy matters.

National Office AA (GSO)
National Office of AA in Australia
48 Firth St, Arncliffe NSW 2205
Phone (02) 9599 8866
Fax (02) 9599 8844
E-mail: national.office@aa.

by Mr. T. Mon Mar 27, 2006 18:30

Tony -

I'm not the person who signs themselves "Curious". I have only once used another pseudonym on this site - "Jimmy Leggs" - when I hadn't decided on a permanent nickname. What possible reason would I have for impersonating some other anonymous poster? Anyways, I wish Indymedia would record & post IP addresses in order to help all discriminate between different posters.

It seems that Curious, like most people who read and respond to your gobbledygook, has gotten himself stuck up to his armpits in your time-wasting intellectual bog-land. He must think the synapses are still firing in that gin addled brain of yours. I guess he hasn't read much of your past rubbish because he seems to have faith that this tet-a-tete will ultimately have some point and conclusion. If he asked me I'd say his time would be spent far more productively by downloading bad porn and wanking for hours on end.

You ought to attend an AA meeting, mate, even if by instant messenger. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. On second thought, your presence would surely drive those poor buggers back to the drink.

by Gay Geori Mon Mar 27, 2006 22:22

Tony" Why are you obsessed with Pat C, Gay Geori and Mr T?"

I'd say he's a closet case...

by Tony Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:29

1 Is it true that since 1979 (which if my sozzled brain is correct was the year of the overthrow of Washington's client tyrant the Shah of Iran) the US has killed far more gays than all the muslim regimes put together?
2 Is it true that while the piddling dictatorships in the third world are portrayed as the new Hitlers, the only country with the industrial and military power to dominate the world is the US?
3 Is it true that the majority of atrocities carried out in Muslim countries are in fact in US client and /or puppet states?
4 Is it true that the only middle eastern country with nuclear weapons is the racist state Israel?
5 Is it true that anti Muslim rants only serve to drive more ordinary Muslims into the arms of the reactionary Muslims?
6 Is it true that the only country which has had large scale pogroms in, say, the last 20 years is India, and that the pogroms were carried out by the Hindutva (Hindu extremists) against Muslims and Sikhs?
7 Is it true that the only country ruled by Nazis which has nuclear weapons was India, when it was ruled by the BJP.?
8 Is it true that it is worse to be a racist than to get drunk?

by Val Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:46

I am fed up with you leaving the empty beer bottles all over the place and puking on the couch. You spend all the housekeeping money on the booze and now I cant even make a phone call because you are always on the PC to your Irish cobbers. I'm getrting a bit suspicious lately though and I have gone through the caches. Funny the way you are looking up so many gayporn sites. Whats all this lollita stuff though?

by Tony Tue Mar 28, 2006 13:08

I’m happy to let the readers of this exchange of comments decide for themselves who has serious political points to make, even if they disagree with me.
I asked a series of political questions, and what was the response? Puerile and reactionary personal scorn
Has free speech come to this – that it is acceptable or clever to make jokes about real or imaginary problems a person may have?

Let’s go through your jibes
1 I drink too much.
Yes, I do. If I’m an alcoholic, as you say, then that’s an illness, and it’s cowardly and reactionary to poke fun at me
2 You claim that I have invented my partner.
Well, let’s suppose I have, that indicates a serious mental illness. What sort of politics is it that makes childish jibes about the mentally ill
3 You imply I’m a closet gay.
I have no intention of being drawn into claims about whether or not I’m gay. Why should I? But let’s assume that I am a closet gay – doesn’t that indicate I’m probably living in a homophobic community, and that you should actually be offering me genuine support?
4 You suggest that I am not housebound.
Again I have no intention of entering a debate about that. Again, though, let’s suppose I’m not housebound. Wouldn’t that indicate that I probably therefore suffer from a mental illness? Surely you don’t think mentally ill people are “fair game”
5 You suggest I don’t live in Australia
Big deal. As you well know your silly denial was the reason I gave you my email address to prove where I live. Notice I gave you the ISP address, not just a Hotmail-type address. What’s more that’s the only reason you have to assume I have a real or imaginary partner called Val
6 You post a silly jibe laughing at the (real or imaginary) Val for having a partner who drinks too much.
Not exactly politically progressive, is it, to laugh at a person who has a partner you describe as an alcoholic?

You see, even your petty and immature apolitical mockery reveals the shallowness of your politics.
Yes, I’m happy to let readers judge who has the best politics

Perhaps your next question should be "Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?"

by Val Tue Mar 28, 2006 13:50

Why are we getting bills from ImaginaryGirlfriend.com and littlelolitas.com? What are those rotten stains near the PC, dont look like booze to me. Strewth! What have you been up to you koala cuddler?